Turner v. United States of America (INMATE 3)

Filing 21

ORDER directing as follows: (1) Petitioner's objection (Doc. # 20 ) is OVERRULED; (2) The Recommendation (Doc. # 19 ) is ADOPTED; (3) Petitioner's 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion is DENIED; (4) This action is dismissed with prejudice because the § 2255 motion was filed after the expiration of the applicable one-year period of limitation, 28 U.S.C. § 2255(f); (5) To the extent that Petitioner requests additional time to brief his objection, the request is DENIED. Signed by Chief Judge William Keith Watkins on March 31, 2015. (scn, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
NORTHERN DIVISION
ANTHONY PERRIE TURNER,
Petitioner,
v.
UNITED STATES OF
AMERICA,
Respondent.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CASE NO. 2:13-CV-734-WKW
[WO]

ORDER
On February 19, 2015, the Magistrate Judge filed a Recommendation in this
case (Doc. # 19), and Petitioner filed a timely objection (Doc. # 20). The court has
conducted an independent and de novo review of those portions of the
Recommendation to which objection is made. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b).
In his objection, Petitioner reiterates the equitable-tolling arguments he
previously made to the Magistrate Judge. The Recommendation addresses and
properly rejects those arguments.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED as follows:
1.

Petitioner’s objection (Doc. # 20) is OVERRULED.

2.

The Recommendation (Doc. # 19) is ADOPTED.

3.

Petitioner’s 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion is DENIED.

4.

This action is dismissed with prejudice because the § 2255 motion

was filed after the expiration of the applicable one-year period of limitation, 28
U.S.C. § 2255(f).
5.

To the extent that Petitioner requests additional time to brief his

objection, the request is DENIED.
A separate judgment will be entered.
DONE this 31st day of March, 2015.
/s/ W. Keith Watkins
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2